The art museum enables people to explore works of art and collections for inspiration,
learning and enjoyment. In its purest sense, the museum hosts the aesthetic experience; that is,
observing, reveling, and studying the nature of art. Unfortunately, this staple experience
promotes the elitist museum stereotype and can intimidate possible first-time visitors. In
addition, this aesthetic encounter seems somewhat archaic and dated to younger audiences
with the numerous ever-evolving forms of technology. Determining what audiences of all
demographics value and find interesting is what helps museum educators and officials
produce what they wish for most: engaged visitors. There seems to be an increasing pressure
for museums to prove their value and relevance to the public, an issue that the Krannert Art
Museum appears to be facing. Located on a college campus, the KAM caters to both the
student population as well as the surrounding Champaign-Urbana community. With its
diverse range of museum goers, the Krannert needs to turn to understanding how visitors are
actively engaged with exhibits and displays and by studying its core audience—college
students—answers of how to attract and, more importantly, keep an audience may be
provided.
How do you define the value of the museum institution to the public? It seems that
actively engaged visitors provide and demonstrate that worth but clearly defining the idea of
“engagement” and “relevance” is difficult to resolve. Possibly because the idea and concept
of art is so very broad and general that its venue is problematic to characterize and grasp.
Ultimately, the goal seems to be to mold visitors that are interested, motivated, and actively
engaged with the content of the exhibitions, displays, and collections in the museum;
educators and researchers then need determine the ways to construct these opportunities for
audiences.
Lankford’s article, “Aesthetic Experience in Constructivist Museums,” opens with
addressing the “paradigm shift” that is impacting museums and its audience; in the digital age
of visual stimulation, mechanical reproduction, and new technologies in education, art
museums seem to have remained relatively stagnant in terms of progressing with their
audience. The aesthetic experience that many art museums cater to requires effort, thought,
motivation on the part of the go-er, who is used to and even expects instant gratification and
stimulation, namely young adults. Lankford explores the museum stereotype; museums do
proudly provide a haven for art-lovers to experience great works of art but they also
simultaneously intimidate potential first-time visitors who are possibly unsure of what to gain
from the experience. Many museums, including KAM, offer more dynamic and appealing
events for all demographics to lure in new visitors and tap into a new audience (Kids at
Krannert, Artzilla, SPEAK Café etc.). However, it may be suggested that this may diminish
and devalue the art museum’s long-standing objective to provide a sanctuary for the aesthetic
experience.
Museum educators then deal with the push-pull of attempting to please the masses without
taking away from the aesthetic experience that some desire. The constructivist museum
model is then a change in the manner or way the art museum presents its didactic information
to engage the viewer, elicit a dialogue, pose questions, and motivate the audience to pursue
their curiosities and interests. It becomes a “meaning-making” experience in which those who
are in control of the meanings are the visitors themselves. This approach would help draw in
more potential visitors while also breaking down the elitist stereotype that many art museums
continue to evoke. Obviously, the “meaning” or “relevance” would be relative to the
individual and because of this wide assortment of responses it seems nearly impossible for
museums to satisfy all goers.
Answers can be posed from studying engagement as a concept which can then be
drawn upon from various modes of audience research by observing and recording interests,
behaviors, and impulses. What exactly does engagement look like in a museum setting at
various events and exhibitions? Through various audience studies and observations at
Krannert, there may be possible insight into what attracts an audience. For instance, Krannert
hosted the Art After Hours event; after discussing ideas with the other members of the
Museums in Action class, the event’s aim was to have a more sophisticated feel through the
featured activities, the décor, and the attire of the workers and those who attended. It
consisted of Pure Euphoria, a runway fashion show, a music performance by Lynn O’Brien,
and free food and drinks for the attendees in the Link Gallery. A wide range of people
attended the event that included a variance in age, ethnicity, and gender. Several students
seemed to attend to support friends in the fashion show and to seize the opportunity to dress
up and enjoy a fun and classy social event. Supporting or accompanying a friend was the
most common reason for attending for the students questioned. Some were specifically
interested in the designers and were curious to see their garments in person while others had
never attended a fashion show and jumped at the chance to see one live in person.
There was a lot of hype surrounding the show and the crowd was much larger than
expected by myself personally as well as some of the interviewees. All enjoyed the show that
I spoke with although many would have liked to see the models come out more quickly; the
lag time in between each model seemed too long and would cause some audience members to
lose interest. Also, some were disappointed in the limited seating and were not able to even
see the show as the event was at capacity. In addition to the runway show, many enjoyed
Lynn O’Brien’s set and the laid-back atmosphere in the museum. The food and drinks
provided were popular and were quickly picked over following the show. The only drawback
was that the attendance of the event immediately dropped following Pure Euphoria; only a
fraction of the audience stayed for the musical performance and an even smaller fraction took
the time to observe the artwork. It seemed there may have been a lack of communication
between the audience and museum as many did not realize that the event was not over
following the show. Moreover, a simple solution such as a quick announcement from staff for
the audience to stick around or additional information on the flyer may have sufficed. It
seemed that for the college students, the most common reason for attending was to
accompany or support a friend. Building connections and relationships with students and
encouraging them to invite friends and family will better secure returning student visitors.
Events similar to Art After Hours help provide insight and commentary as to new
marketing and planning strategies. An important question to discuss: Do events overly
dominate the space as simply a venue or do they compliment the galleries and encourage
visitors to observe the artwork? It seems that there should be a common thread, no matter
how subtle, between such events and the museum space that motivates and interests visitors.
There is then the concept of free-choice learning, an issue that Falk addresses in his article,
“Making Museums Better Learning Experiences,” discusses the concept of free-choice
learning. Not only should goers have an educational, interesting experience but they should
continue to pursue their interests and build upon their newly acquired knowledge outside of
the museum space. How do we design spaces and construct events to be more successful in
this manner for visitors? Positive marketing techniques may be an important mode of
communication and outreach to campus-town and surrounding community in addition to a
way to shape the audience’s perception and experience prior to their visit. New techniques
can be applied to instill motivation and attract a wider more diverse audience. Falk cites the
example of the VMFA exhibit, Spirit of the Motherland, in accordance with their African art
collection in which new methods of advertising were employed. The main pitch was that the
museum was a great place for families to visit through eye-catching logos, banners, radio and
television advertisements etc. Also, a performance with children that had been planned weeks
prior to the opening with an African dance master attracted many families in the area. Despite
the disparity in the target audience, this example could aide Krannert Museum in new
marketing plans or approaches to reach out to the array of different majors on campus.
Although KAM has flyers, website posts, and various advertisements, it feels as though there
is a large group of students that is untapped. By reaching out to non-art majors and bringing
events or publicity to the streets; promotion on the quad, green street, and other popular
campus venues would attract more visitors and more importantly, make students aware of
Krannert! By educating the campus audience about Krannert’s free events and the interesting
activities that it hosts (yoga classes, SPEAK Café, Petals and Painting etc), it may spark an
interest, curiosity or discourse about the museum while drawing in first-time visitors.
When discussing art museums, the concept of engagement surfaces repeatedly yet
defining its parameters or what it exactly looks and sounds like is much more difficult to
accomplish. Audience research seems to be the best method for museum educators to draw
upon visitor interests, motivations, and behaviors to better construct free-choice learning
opportunities. This is incumbent on museum educators and directors to understand and
address what is valuable to the public. By employing new and interesting marketing
techniques and taking advantage of audience studies and interviews, museums such as
Krannert can better supply an inspiring, educational, and interactive environment for a wide
demographic that includes students and community members alike.
Bibliography
Falk, John H. and Lynn D. Dierking. "Ch. 10: Making Museums Better Learning
experiences." Learning from Museums: Visitor experiences and the making of meaning.
Altamira Press, 2000. 177-204.
Lankford, E. Louis. "Aesthetic Experience in Constructivist Museums." Journal of
Aesthetic Education 36.2 (2002: Summer): 140-153.